I9I4.] H. Brunetti : Review of Genera tn Culicidae. 37 



pending some quite decisive method of dividing these two 

 groups.^ 



After a critical survey of the proposed genera in the Culicini, 

 founded on the descriptions of the promoters (since Httle else is 

 available to me) it appears as though, from the systematist's point 

 of view the only valid genera in the Culex group are : (i) Deinoceri- 

 tes, distinguished by its exceptionally long 2nd antennal joint; 

 (2) Lophoceratomyia , by the fantastic abdornment of the cf ant en 

 nae; (3) Rachionotomyia , by the spine-like production of the 

 scutellum; (4 — 6) Psorophora, Janthinosoma and Mucidus, by 

 the outstanding scales on the legs, these latter three differentiated 

 amongst themselves by fairly good characters; (7) Ekrinomyia, by 

 the posterior cross vein being placed beyond the anterior cross 

 vein, assuming this to be definite and constant in conjunction 

 with the absence of outstanding leg scales; (8) Mimomyia (with 

 several synon^'ms) by the 2-jointed, more or less clavate cf palpi; 

 and (9) Stegomyia, by the 5-jointed cf and 4-jointed 2 palpi, but 

 this latter genus is admitted herein on the presumption that this 

 character is definite and constant, which, b^^ the wa^^ is not too 

 certain. 



The following good genera occur in the Aedes group: (i) 

 Haemagogus, distinguished by the distinctly 5-jointed antennae in 

 both sexes; (2) Harpagoniyia, by the elbowed proboscis; (3) Hod- 

 gesia, by its 13-jointed antennae and one-jointed palpi, in both 

 cases in the 2 only, the d^ being unknown. 



The remainder of the Aedines^ should fall in Aedes or Skusea, 

 technically distinguished by a 2-jointed cf and 4-jointed 2 palpi 

 in the former, and a 3-jointed palpi in both sexes in the latter, 

 and it seems wise to acknowledge both genera. Aedes is, of 

 course, a quite sound genus of many years' standing, but much 

 uncertainty attaches to the descriptions of most of the recent 

 genera and species. Uranotaenia will hold good if the character 

 of 2-jointed palpi in & and 2 can be trusted. 



After accounting for the above as good genera in Culicini 

 there remains a very large number of species and groups of species, 

 including Culex itself, which have little, if anything, taxonomically 

 to separate them from one another except still vaguer palpal 

 characters, all of admitted variabihty, the difficulty of unravelling 

 the puzzle being increased by the limited information authors have 

 been able to afford. 



Scale characters I strongly resent being considered of generic 

 value, and the continual shifting of species from one genus to 

 another and of genera from the Culex to the Aedes group and vice 

 versa, emphasises both their instability and the existing want of 

 unity of opinion even amongst culicidologists themselves. 



1 Mr. Edwards admits the $ claws are variable in at least one species— 5i!eg- 

 omyia simpsoni, Theob. See Howavdina, in List of Genera, p. 62. 



4 The ^et^es group is considered separately further on, as being more con- 

 venient. 



